M
MCP Directory CURATED DIRECTORY
911 MCP servers indexed
中文
← Back to directory
COMPARE UP TO 4 SERVERS

Compare MCP servers

Compare scores, permissions, risks, and fit in one decision-focused table.

DimensionPare CmakeStructured CMake/CTest build system operations as typed JSON.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS24 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability2 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions4 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance10 / 2016 / 20
Documentation3 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience5 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • C/C++ projects using CMake build system.
  • AI coding assistants needing reliable, programmatic access to build status.
  • Engineering teams scaling AI coding agents while controlling spend
  • Platform teams that need auditable, rollback-aware agent execution records
  • Organizations using multiple agents (Claude, Codex, Gemini) under one governed flow
Not for
  • Not applicable for projects without CMake or CTest.
  • Not suited for scenarios requiring GUI or interactive build tools.
  • Developers who just want a simple code-completion helper without run governance
  • Teams unwilling to accept local JSONL run records with HMAC signing
  • Environments without a supported adapter (Claude/Codex/Gemini CLIs, direct provider, or verifier-only)
Required permissions
  • Executes CMake and CTest commands, potentially reading/writing project directories.
  • Receives commands via stdio and returns JSON output.
  • Read/write access to the configured repo root (writable scope restrictable via --allow-path/--deny-path)
  • Ability to invoke the chosen agent CLI (Claude/Codex/Gemini, etc.) and its underlying model account
  • Local disk writes for run records, receipts, and share outputs (share/run-receipt., etc.)
  • Execution of user-configured verifier commands (e.g. npm test)
Risks and side effects
  • Executing build commands may modify the file system or run long tasks.
  • Misconfiguration or faulty build commands could lead to build failures or resource consumption.
  • As a third-party tool, there is supply chain risk; verify package authenticity.
  • Verifier commands are executed; poorly chosen verifier commands carry security risk despite preflight policy checks
  • Cost and token figures may be estimates (labeled with provenance) and should not be treated as settled accounting
  • Receipt integrity must be verified before use as trustworthy evidence; missing rollback evidence is flagged as EVIDENCE_BOUNDARY
  • Policy defaults come from martin.config.yaml and can be overridden by CLI flags; misconfiguration can loosen safety boundaries
Supported clientsClaude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Cline / Roo Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Zed, ContinueClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00